Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!decwrl!world!eff!mnemonic
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: "Bad" backups
Message-ID: <1990Dec18.020803.2058@eff.org>
Date: 18 Dec 90 02:08:03 GMT
References: <1990Dec11.164524.1860@digibd.com> <1990Dec12.162746.1411@eff.org> <1990Dec17.171753.24860@digibd.com>
Organization: The Electronic Frontier Foundation
Lines: 44

In article <1990Dec17.171753.24860@digibd.com> merlyn@digibd.com (Brian Westley (Merlyn LeRoy)) writes:
>In article <1990Dec12.162746.1411@eff.org> mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
>[ the same argument we've been having for 3x2 articles or so ]
>
>Short summary:
>I sez    "Keep everything in RAM"
>Mike sez "That will possibly increase no-knock searches"

I said no such thing.

What I said was, if you set out to obstruct justice, and you
announce your intention to do so, you will increase the likelihood
of no-knock searches.

>Most of this seems to boil down to how each of us deals with
>[real or potential] abuses of authority.  I prefer a more
>confrontational/defiant response compared to Mike (at least
>in this instance).

I prefer to deal with the abuses of authority by depriving law
enforcement of any rational basis for gratuitous no-knock searches.

Of course, my work becomes much harder whenever someone announces
his intention to obstruct justice by boobytrapping his data.

>A few disasterous no-knock searches _might_ end the stupidity faster,
>and do less overall damage, than a larger number of knock-knock
>searches (like Steve Jackson Games).

Right. In the same way that disastrous no-knock searches in the
War on Drugs have increased the power of the Fourth Amendment
(that is to say, not at all).



--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin, (617) 864-0665 |"If the doors of perception were cleansed
mnemonic@eff.org            | every thing would appear to man as it is,
Electronic Frontier         | infinite."
Foundation                  |                 --Blake